Confucianism: String Thoery and the Net LO22638

AM de Lange (
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 15:44:54 +0200

Replying to LO22626 --

Dear Organlearners,

Andrew Campona < > writes:

>Confusionism: String Theory and the Net
>Dear Learners,

Greetings Andrew,

Now you got me confused, using "confuscianism" and "confusionism" !

>This message is about 10,000 words short...

Sadly, I cannot use the "spell checker" of WordPerfect in MS Outlook
Express. MS wants me to use the "spell checker" in their Office. But once
I load Office, my PC become vulnerable to "macro" based "virusses". I once
had a hard disc crushing because of a virus. I do not want it ever to
happen again. Thus, it is one case where I cut the shoe string and leave a
hole in the net smiling all the way.

>Half way back to Confucius and two thirds back to Christ.

Like a true artist you say so much with so few words.

Jesus refered to himself as the Son of God and the "Son of man". This was
most blasphemous to any orthodox Jew in those times. Interestingly enough,
to compare Christ (as Son of Man) with other great thinkers and teachers
before and after him, seems to be equally blasphemous to some Christians.
As for me, such comparisons helps me to see what Jesus meant by "Son of
man". Thank you Andrew for your input.

>Both were quintessentially midwives and
>'learning organisations'.

Wow, again I am confused. I know that the word
quintessence refer to the fifth essence, the other four being
the elements "earth, fire, water, air" of Greek philsophers
in general. Do you still remember my Primer on Entropy,
beginning with
In it I tried to do something vary daringly in the face of
hard-core physicists, namely to show that LEC and LEP
(LEC=Law of Energy Conservation LEP=Law of Entropy
Production) emerged as a result of the scinetists among
humankind's search for quintessence!

I agree with you that Jesus and Confucius like so many others) acted as
midwifes for the quintessence. What "quintessence"? Well, Pythagoras (the
man famous for "eureka") saw the need for a fifth element -- a celestial
spirit guiding the other four elements so that these four could give birth
to all things. This celestial spirit of Pythagoras is what Senge of LO
fame will call "metanoia".

Andrew, If you would have written
">Both were midwives for quintessence so much needed"
">to guide "learning organisations"",
I would have followed you perfectly. As it now stands, the only
thing which I can make out of it, is that Jesus, Confucius (with
others like them) are part of a very unique learning organisation
not bounded by space and time.

Why not bounded by space and time? Jesus and Confuscious lived in
different continents at different times. Yet they are part of a unique
"learning organisation" because of the way in which they looked at the
universe. Perhaps we may identify this Learning Organisation, not bound by
space and time, as the "LO of Sages". I consider Job, a man from the Old
Testament, as someone who is also a member of this "LO of Sages". Job
lived another 1500 years before even Confucious!!

Perhaps my confusion is the result of thinking that I have to take it
slower with you. Maybe I will have to take it faster. In that case there
is no confusion. You are indeed refering to a "LO of Sages". Because your
very next sentence makes then perfect sense for me:

>How long is a piece of string?

Its illustration is even more beautiful:

>Confucius offered this piece of wisdom.
>Sz, you regard me as one who has studies a lot and
>remembers it, do you not? He replied, Yes. Is that wrong?
>He said, It is wrong. I have one thing by which I string it all
>Hmmm, I wonder what that 'one' thing was?
>Some of us like it made simple. And, when we get it simple
>do we keep it simple?
>Some of us like it complex. And, when we get it complex do
>we keep it complex?
>Perhaps it is all simply too complex?

Yes, the grass on the other side of the fence is greener.

The longing for, what Leibniz called, perfection. The longing to emerge
into heaven rather than immerge into hell.

>Consider; aloft you are any-man, any-woman, every-man,
>Grounded you are trapped in 'you'. Ego. A good place, a
>bad place, swinging to and fro'? Alone you search gradually
>for others, when with others you gradually search for solitude.
>You can have both, each and every way.
>There are many people who walk in crowds and are alone,
>there are those I know who are alone when among others.

The harmony between symmetry and its breaking!

The harmony which we find in LEC and LEP once we open our minds to such an
incredible harmony. A harmony which I have tried to show ultimately leads
to unconditional love -- agape, the culmination of the one-to-many-mapping
form the Creator to Creation.

>In my 'reading' Confucian wisdom guides to the understanding
>that 'virtue'- love, agape, friendship and leadership for that
>matter, issues from outward from inwardness.

Yes, the wonderful interaction between the "world-outside-me" and the
"world-inside-me". I wonder what Winfried Dressler and Leo Minningh would
say about it because they have indicated on many occasions how much they
contemplate this interaction. And I know that their minds are changing,
becoming more complex on this subject.

The problem with many of the people in the "world-outside-me" of a
specific person is that they want to intrude on the "world-inside-me" of
that person. Some do it is such a terrible manner that it can be called
"spiritual rape".

Jesus himself, according to the gospels, showed that he persistently
avoided "spriritual intrusion". In fact, John, the apostle of agape
documented the following words of Jesus for us: "Look, I stand at the door
and I knock".

But I have to rush myself. Notice that I have said that the "LO of Sages"
is not bounded by space and time. My official job is to create CAE
(Computer Assisted Education) lessons. The bottom line criterium which I
use for all CAE and CBT (Computer Based Training) lessons are: Does this
lesson go beyond the bounds of space and time? I could also have asked
simply: Does this lesson guide the learner to universal and eternal

Now , let us come to the "Net" which you have included in the subject line
of our topic. I develop "stand alone" alone lessons, needing but one PC.
However, what about lessons on the NET?

I have to jump over many of your beautiful throughts. It makes me sad to
do this. I then come to:

>Maybe it has something to do with knots and tangles that,
>when so disordered, become nets with which to fish in rivers
>and oceans. Oh, and so like being born, issued in waters
>from a dark cave on the end of a bit of string sustaining of life
>in one mode that, once knotted must make me and you
>proceed on an entirely different journey, the 'door' being
>closed behind to open a different world, for a while.
>How long will I be here? How long is a bit of string?
>Have I departed an old labyrinth or entered a new one?
>What is this 'string' quality that is so prized? Where is
>the 'quality' of string? Surely, it is an illusion that string
>as 'stuff' has quality (content) when it has only quantity
>(form). But sit down with it, play with it, and create what
>you will, what you can, what you desire, what is even
>beyond conscious desire and need and let others judge
>the virtue you bring out from the string into the world. Illusion
>played 'right' becomes vision and while 'vision is what vision
>does', vision does what vision is.

Did you mean "quality (content)" and "quantity (form)"? For if you did,
then it is indeed an illusion. However, would you have written "quantity
(content)" and "quality (form)", then you have transformed illusion into

>Some anthropologists think that the ancient creative
>technologies associated with spinning and weaving were
>developed by, specifically, women. Women, story tellers,
>educators, midwives among each other, giving birth,
>tying knots, knitting, spinning yarns. SPINNING YARNS?
>That means telling a story. I've already said that. (I must
>go talk more with women)

I wonder how many people realise that the NET is humankind's most recent
"reinvention of the wheel", of once again giving the opportunity for
"story tellers, educators, midwives among each other, giving birth, tying
knots, knitting, spinning yarns". All these things belong to the DIALOGUE,
that strange thing in which humans exchange symbols with each other so
that each could discover the "world-inside-me" in all others without
intruding like in discussion, concusions an repercusions.

This is one of the things which distinguishes the sage. The sage do not
intrude in the "world-inside-me" of any other person.

Sadly, that dispensation is now almost gone. In its
place we now have a "world-outside-me" which try more
and more to rape by whatever means the "world-inside-me".
So there awaits new tasks for the "LO of Sages".
* How to help victims of "spiritually raping" how to overcome
the destructions in their past so as to live constructively.
* How to help our children to avoid such "spiritual rapings".
* How to provide for some islands in the "world-outside-me"
where such "spiritual raping" do not occur.

What are these islands where spiritual raping are avoided at all costs? Is
it not Learning Organisations?

Best wishes


At de Lange <> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <>